Re: Frame System

That sounds nice, but I need an example for that.
Let's take a csg with two boxes, corner1 of the second box is animated =

and the csg contains a rotation that is animated

union {
  box{ <-1, -1, -1>, <1, 1, 1> pigment{}}
  box{ <clock*2,1,1>,<2,1,2> pigment{}}
  rotate x*clock
}

Assume there is an object that knows that the second box and the rotate =

is animated and assume that the povray serializer knows how to put these =

comments, how will your povray code (inclusive the animated points) look =

like? Putting comments at the beginning and end of an object should be =

possible in a clean way with the current povray serializer.

For the two objects: If you implement a frame system there needs to be =

an object that records the scene changes during animation or during =

scripting and that object knows after animation which objects and which =

attributes where changed. Maybe it can use the undo/redo system with the =

PMMemento class. That should make your two objects obsolete.


Miguel Angel G=F3mez M=E1rquez schrieb:

>Would it be too ugly to use a preprocessor ( parser) before calling
>the renderer?
>-------
>A possible answer i want to opinions on and for to make basic
>animations without modifying much the code would be adding  2 objects
>(in the same window for the moment) putting a tag or label that says
>that the first object is the begining and the last one is the end.
>Then to make the tween we call the function x (which was selected by a
>combo box or something) this case linear, and  linear function will do
>something like:
>
>TWEEN ALGORITHM  Linear(){}
>                              Spline(){}                            *
>   Frame  =3D Relative Tweened Object
>                              Whatever(){}
>
>
>BoxEnd::propertieX - BoxBegin::propertieX
>----------------------------------------------------         *
>CLOCK  =3D BoxTween::PropertieX
>                           Frames
>                     (or just Box)
>
>
>
>
>So before writing the .POV temp file the BoxEnd and BoxBegin will be
>removed (filtered, so they wont be drawn) and we get as result the
>Draw just of the tween (animated frame).
>
>In theory those tags can be added just as a comment so most of the
>code won't be touched. (comments like the name of the objects )
>would be something like
>
>//*PMFrames=3D10 (for the whole animation)
>
>//*PMBegin1
>Box  bla bla
>
>//*PMBegin2
>Light
>
>//*PMEnd2
>Light
>
>//*PMEnd1
>Box bla bla
>
>
>Then instead of
>KPM in memory --> Serializer ---> Render TMP File
>Would be
>KPM in memory ---> Tween processor --- Serializer ---> Render TMP File
>
>So we would only modify some visual widgets. and making the Tween module.
>
>So, what about this idea?
>This will keep intact the clean framework of the actual code.
>
>By the way, which distro do you use mates?
>I bet you use Debian or SuSE.
>
>List archive and information: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kpovmo=
deler-devel
>
>  =

>


List archive and information: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kpovmod=
eler-devel